Jamie Humphreys

Will on the hill said:
Humphreys played very well, especially for a debutante. I don't think anyone is disputing that he should've been selected against the Bunnies.

I didn't see anything so amazing that he was the difference in that game or this game. The two teams we put on the field and the teams we played against were very different.

I'd go so far as to say if JH played the Bunnies and misses the Knights the results are very similar, at most we are maybe 6-10 points +\- better off.

His non selection was an error but the magnitude of the error is being grossly exaggerated.

Form is ephemeral and who knows if JH was selected against the Bunnies it's possible his confidence takes a hit and we don't get to see that performance today.
Click to expand...
100% … the knights where ****e today!

I don’t want to get carried away with 1 game against the knights.

Dare I say it people on here were saying similar things about Cade Cust…. Anyway I wish the kid the very best … but I still don’t see him at this stage being any better than Arthur…. But time will tell I guess.

Just sayin’
 
Under the Sticks said:
I and I’m sure many others would agree we would have done more than put up 17 BrooksBombs that night if he was in the side and maybe Talau could have made an impact at centre.

I was at that game and we were close behind about 4-0 until towards the end. There wasn’t much in it and highly likely a real half could have made a bit of a difference.

Seibold selections for that match didn’t pass the pub test (no offence Lawman but you ain’t no halfback).
Click to expand...

You were at the game?

And didn't notice Lawton not playing halfback?
 
I think the non selection was frustrating and Seibold after the souths game saying we had no other options when we obviously did but what really ruffled my feathers as a feathered friend is he looks like he has the makings to be a really great player and we've let him go, plus he's good to look at but that goes out the window if you're wearing a red and green jersey.
 
XV-1 said:
Seibold and Sheikheagle certainly did.

Souths were ordinary against us, but the non selection of a halfback certainly was a poor choice that pretty much gave us little hope of winning.
Brooks composure today compared to the game vs Souths was very different as against Souths he tried to do everything, unsuccessfully. Having Humphreys with his chrisp passing and halfback experience helped Brooks today play his more natural game.
Click to expand...
Do you think having Tom, Rueben, Haumole and Aloiai helped Brooks play his natural game?

Or was it all Humphreys?
 
ManlyTragic said:
100% … the knights where ****e today!

I don’t want to get carried away with 1 game against the knights.

Dare I say it people on here were saying similar things about Cade Cust…. Anyway I wish the kid the very best … but I still don’t see him at this stage being any better than Arthur…. But time will tell I guess.

Just sayin’
Click to expand...
Yeah, I agree. The Knights were very ordinary. Humphreys did a good job. He was solid and did what we needed him to do. Feed the back line and let the senior players do their thing against a clearly outclassed Knights backline. He wasn't short on confidence but didn't overplay his hand.

In fairness to Seibs, he said in the presser that coz he had been playing 9 in reggies, he felt he needed a few games back at 7 before throwing him in to 1st Gde. Was that a conservative decision? Sure. Did those extra games at 7 help him play solid today? We'll never know.

Anyway, good on the kid and hope he goes on for a solid career. Frankly, I was more excited about Hoppa and his freaky skills with that Talau try. Incredible.
 
Ha, I'd say thats Seibs trying to justify his error.

He should have played Humphrey's against Souths. I'm not convinced it changes the result but having a half is better than not.

At least he wasnt stubborn and corrected his error.
 
In any case, I reckon Jamie would be stoked with his debut, a big win in front of a full house at Brookie before a pantheon of Manly club greats. Probably would also have enjoyed getting run over by Jack Wighton on a miserable rain-sodden night before a sparse opposition crowd. But I doubt he's complaining about that right now!
 
Disco said:
Ha, I'd say thats Seibs trying to justify his error.

He should have played Humphrey's against Souths. I'm not convinced it changes the result but having a half is better than not.

At least he wasnt stubborn and corrected his error.
Click to expand...
Yeah, you're probably right @:D
 
Does anyone think our previous coach would have given Humphreys a go against souths?
I think not… but that’s just my opinion!
He seemed very reluctant to try new players except when it got to jersey gate!

Just sayin’
 
Humphreys had a great game today . Perhaps why he wasn't selected versus Souths was that he was injured early in week and couldn't train , so Seibs decided to go with Plan B ? Jamie may have been given up until game day to play NSW Cup because he knows their structures etc
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Users who are viewing this thread

Total: 1 (members: 0, guests: 1)

Members online

Total: 383 (members: 7, guests: 376)

Latest posts

Team P W L PD Pts
0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0

Online statistics

Members online
7
Guests online
376
Total visitors
383
Totals may include hidden visitors.

Latest posts

Newest members

Stay Connected

Back
Top Bottom